Ron Johnson wrote:
After reading how much you like T-bird, I installed it and tried
it. However, it does not let me use sendmail as the outgoing
email method. That's... unbelievable.
Sure it can, it just uses the SMTP method of access. Want to know what is
unbelievable? mutt not being
Ron Johnson wrote:
After reading how much you like T-bird, I installed it and tried
it. However, it does not let me use sendmail as the outgoing
email method. That's... unbelievable.
Sure it can, it just uses the SMTP method of access. Want to know what is
unbelievable? mutt not being
Ron Johnson wrote:
Evolution, T-bird, Mutt, Sylpheed Outlook, Web Mail are all IMAP-
capable MUAs. I've read, though, that T-bird doesn't have good
IMAP capabilities, though.
Thunderbird has one of the best IMAP implementations around.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who
Ron Johnson wrote:
Even sub-folders?
Not sure, never had a server that did subfolders so never really cared.
OTOH I did care that I tried prior to Thunderbird seemed capable of storing
sent mail on the server. Seemed dumb to me to force local folders for sent
mail, drafts and other such
Richard wrote:
Thought I would re-explain myself
I'm not sure why, people address both of your concerns adequately with
several solutions all of which work just fine. Instead of reexplaining
yourself take a moment to actually examine the solutions people have offered
to see if they fit your
Jiann-Ming Su wrote:
I have no experience with the LVM snapshots. I've been using rsync
snapshots as described at
http://www.mikerubel.org/computers/rsync_snapshots/.
Or one could skip doing all of that manually and just do it with
dirvish.
Description: Filesystem based backup system
Matthias Julius wrote:
To cite the U.S. Constitution
(from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html):
,
| Section 8 - Powers of Congress
|
| The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties,
| Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common
| Defence and
Paul E Condon wrote:
And, you get to *choose* something else for your own children, if you can
pay for it. But you are not paying twice. You are paying once, your share
for everybody, and once for your own.
Uh, sorry, BZZZT, no. If I am paying for everyone else's why aren't they
paying
First off, sa-exim is not depreciated. The last update was in January.
Secondly, sa-exim can do things exiscan can't. Two different ways of
approaching the problem.
Martin A. Brooks wrote:
I'd be pretty surprised if per-user settings weren't possible. I've
never tried to do this
Paul Johnson wrote:
Accept it, only deliver to the negative user would be the sane way of
handling it. Either that, or 550 it and say Delivered to ..., not
delivered to ...
You're not understanding the problem. Think of it at the SMTP level,
we're filtering there, right? Ok.
rcpt to:
Paul Johnson wrote:
Who's settings do you use?
Both.
Even worse, which Bayesian database do you
use?
Both.
How?
Has nothing been done to fix this?
Again, how? You're not grasping that it is not possible with how mail
works. And that's not even getting into how unix
Curt Howland wrote:
As much as I hate to nit-pick, because it's obvious your heart is in
the right place, Mr. Johnson, there is a very serious disconnect
between the term privatization (or deregulation) and the reality of
continued government intervention.
In the interest of helping
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And if the neighbourhood thief is breaking into your home, he is more
likely to be armed with a gun if he thinks you probably are.
No, chances are if the neighborhood thief is already breaking the law by
trespassing with the intent to break the law by stealing
John - wrote:
Despite the political prejudices of a great many participants, Debian
may be the world's best instance of socialism in practice. If
socialists were smart, they'd learn something from this. Ditto
capitalists. Double ditto libertarian hardliners.
And just what have you
Rich Johnson wrote:
Do any schools have _separate_ History and Geography classes?
In my day, yes.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't recall ever having seen inefficiency as a defining property of
government.
Do you recall efficiency as a defining property?
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
Paul Johnson wrote:
[1] For 100 years ago. It's too bad we haven't bothered to keep up with the
world on this, Americans now get fewer days off, work more hours and at lower
pay than most of the western world.
And amazingly enough we have lower unemployment and are still the driving
Rich Johnson wrote:
Oh, so the objection is to _dissident_ poltical teaching. Heaven forbid
that high school students should be challenged to think and decide for
themselves.
Uh, no, try again. The problem in this case there was political speech at
all during a GEOGRAPHY lesson.
FWIW,
Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
US $9,900,000,000 (billion) profits /by one oil company/ in one
quarter when retail prices were skyrocketing. Does that seem like the
oil cartel has the American interests at heart?
Didn't I address just this in a message 2 days ago? I make a widget for
$1, sell it
Paul Johnson wrote:
I suppose that's true if you're willing to say that the vast majority of US
airports don't exist. Many television stations, hospitals, police
departments, etc. have airports that aren't government owned. So do many
ranchers and aviation clubs.
Well, how many of
Steve Lamb wrote:
Rich Johnson wrote:
on when I was in high school 10 years ago. Difference here was that a student
had the cajones to record him and expose him.
Man, wish it were 10 years ago. More like 16. *gasp*
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream
Matthias Julius wrote:
So there are people without children who pay for public education.
This means the average parent who has kids in a public school is
paying less than what he would have to if he had to pay it all by
himself.
Yes, because the childless person just doesn't need that
Matthias Julius wrote:
Why is that so? Just because it is a public school? Why is a public
school by definition so different from a private school? Is there no
way of making a public school more (cost-)efficient?
Yes. We're discussing it right now. :P
Seriously though which is
Matthias Julius wrote:
The same is true for drugs and other controlled substances. Would you
vote making them freely available?
I would, and have. Or rather, at the very least, decriminalized the ones
that are criminalized now. Because drugs encompasses more than just the
illegal ones I
Matthias Julius wrote:
How do you recognize well-intentioned and law-abiding citizens? What
makes this difficult is that people change. They buy a gun as a
well-intentioned and law-abiding citizen in case they need to defend
themselfes. Then a while later when they are upset or drunk they
Paul Johnson wrote:
You directly benefit (even without kids) by being surrounded by (relatively)
educated people. Just like freeways: While bicycles may be allowed on most
of them, odds are bicyclists are paying for miles of urban freeway that is
closed to bicycles. Is it fair that
Rich Johnson wrote:
Er...they also VOTE!
I, for one, definitely prefer an educated electorate to an ignorant
one. It's kinda' important, even though all indications are that
emotional arguments usually win.
Even worse, most people couldn't name their congresscritter or
representatives
Rich Johnson wrote:
I didn't write that.
Yes, my apologies for the seemingly misattribution. I should have removed
Rich's attribution line. However since they were both on the same quote
level I hope people would catch that his attribution line would match a 2nd
level of quotation which
Matthias Julius wrote:
The situation is a little be different here. They're not suddenly
selling 2 trillion widgets instead of one. They are selling each one
of them for $1.50 instead of $1.10. And why do they need special tax
breaks when they seem to do well?
Nope, the situation is no
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
- A bureaucracy so big and unweidly it makes it close to impossible for
educators to actually educate
Or worse, ordered not to educate (*cough*Kansas*cough*)
- People sending their kids there is a tacit acceptance of the state
indoctrinating their children
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
I'm not sure if that's true. Is it society's job? If so, does
government enact the will of society?
No. That's where a whole mess comes into play. At least in my opinion
Government's role is to get out of the way of society. It is to set a
minimum.. BARE
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
This is a point where I think we can agree to disagree. I think it
could. And I'm not at all sure it's not the province of government.
But that's the one solid point we can prove; at least at the federal
level. All powers not granted to the federal government by
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
Sure, poor areas have McDonald's, WalMart, and Dollar Tree. Not so many
organic food markets and Gucci stores, I think. I guess I could be
wrong; I haven't extensively toured poor neighborhoods to check.
True, true. But since in a privatized setting the concept
Mumia W wrote:
The purpose of the public programs is to ensure that *something* is
there for the middle class and poor. It doesn't have to be gold-plated.
IMHO it isn't that they outperform. It is that they are outright harmful
on matter how they perform.
The purpose of public education
Mumia W wrote:
Abolish public education, and the private schools might just start
treating parents and students like crap.
And those schools would lose their students as their parents moved them to
more responsive schools. Non-issue.
Certainly, if a single company
came to dominate
Mumia W wrote:
Steve Lamb wrote:
Christopher Nelson wrote:
[...]
Sure you can. Nothing's forcing you to have your kids in public
schools. And shopping around for a good public school district is part
of being a responsible parent if you can't afford/don't like private
school.
A good
Mumia W wrote:
The Right Wing *is* class and race warface. That's what drives them, and
that's what gives them political success.
Uh, no. Try again. Some of the worst offenders when it comes to
class and race warfare are staunchly leftist.
The biggest wealth redistribution in planetary
Rich Johnson wrote:
ROFLMAO! You're calling for the elimination of History, Citizenship,
Government, and even the ''Pledge of Allegiance''.
No, there's a difference between teaching those subjects and going off on
a political tirade during a Geography lesson:
Mumia W wrote:
Social Security is a government program. There's nothing wrong about
using taxes to support a government program.
There is when the program is highly suspect. Like the Alaskan bridge to
nowhere.
It's part of the upkeep of the society.
Don't buy that one, either.
Paul Johnson wrote:
Nice attitude. Vast portions of Oregon and parts of rural Washington led the
continent in unemployment for the first half of this decade. I'm sure you
would have rather let one in five people in the pacific northwest die of
starvation instead.
Of course not. But
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
But that happens all the time. People who don't drive still pay taxes
for roads.
And they also never take public transportation on those roads, pay for
transportation across those roads, never have emergency medical services
travel to them and transport them to the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I recall correctly when I looked at the Baen site last year, they usually
release on book in a series online. Those that read the first book and like
it
will have to buy the rest of the series. Has this changed?
This is up to the author. They can put the
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
Nice way to avoid the point.
Nope, didn't avoid a thing. As you admit your case was constructed.
Furthermore it did not address what I said.
You said, and I quote:
The short, short form is that EICs are issued for people being
irresponsible (like, having
Paul Johnson wrote:
No, the locals are more than capable of doing that. However, we aren't able
to defend ourselves against large swarms of Californians overrunning us.
Ahhh yes, the tired ol' Blame the Californians game. Tsk. See, down
here in Vegas we got that problem licked. Every
Mumia W wrote:
Great. You understand that roads are a social benefit. Not having the
elderly rotting on the streets is also a social benefit.
Yes, having them rot in homes is so much better because they weren't able
to invest their own money in something to yield a higher return so they
Christopher Nelson wrote:
That's your right, but unless you can *gaurantee* that I can, for no
cost, send my children to a 100% secular school with decent teaching,
there is no way I can support abolishing public schools. And if you can
gaurantee that, where does the line between public and
Paul Johnson wrote:
Because society benefits from an educated public. If you want to do away
with
public education, look to Mexico first: Public education only covers through
grade six there.
Yes, it does. Which, of course, has nothing to do with the public
education system here.
Mumia W wrote:
Social Security is not highly suspect. It's not even suspect. It's
simply the most popular social program in U.S. history.
Just because it is popular doesn't mean people don't find it suspect.
How does protecting the poor and elderly destroy society?
Vote pandering,
Christopher Nelson wrote:
The same reason you should pay taxes for roads you don't drive
on--because at all stages of life having an educated workforce benifits
you, just as it benifits you for people (eg utility companies) to drive
on roads you particularly don't use. Or would you rather not
Kent West wrote:
Sure, you'll have to pay in at the end of the
year, but you're paying in less than you were paying, because now you're
getting the interest.
Ah, but here's the rub. That interest is considered income and he has to
pay taxes on it. Gotta love where one of the problems
Kent West wrote:
Sure, you'll have to pay in at the end of the
year, but you're paying in less than you were paying, because now you're
getting the interest.
Ah, but here's the rub. That interest is considered income and he has to
pay taxes on it. Gotta love where one of the problems
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
If you think education is
bad now, federalizing it would likely square or cube the problem. Don't
believe me? Just look at the decline in the quality of education in
this country since the formation of the Dept of Education.
Not to mention that phrase just made
Mumia W wrote:
Not everyone has the choice that you have. For *most* people, it's
either a free education, or no education. That's why public schools are
needed.
And why would it be no education if they were no longer required to pay
for the total lack of education from the public sector
Christopher Nelson wrote:
I feel like I'm missing the point, but in case it's teaching political
tenets as fact: on that I think we squarely agree. I've not heard people
complaining about it, but it would be equally as reprehensible as
religion
As in cases where teachers are using their
Larry Garfield wrote:
Except that it's not a 1:1 tradeoff. The tuition cost for a good private
school is more than what an individual family would get back in their taxes
by eliminating public schools. Substantially more.
How do you know? Right now the cost per pupil for public
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
It's a sad reality that not all adults are responsible.
Yes, it is. Problem is is it really the government's role, especially at
the federal level, to deal with that problem? Or is it more appropriate for
local institutions and local governments where people have
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
There are people who believe that amending the Constitution to prevent
gay marriage is somehow a worthwhile cause. People believe all sorts
of crazy stuff.
Exactly. And the crazy stuff here is that public education is somehow up
to snuff and worth continuing.
Paul Johnson wrote:
You know nothing of my party or it's politics. Socialists are progressive,
not conservative.
Socialists are thieves who pass off their practice under a veneer of
intellectual doublespeak.
No, Republicans are not the least bit socialist. They're anti-public
Gene Heskett wrote:
Well, he could, because its worse than that, 1% of the people here
control 90% of the wealth according to some figures I heard on C-SPAN
tonight in congressional testimony. Thats not right, and its sure not
a democracy.
Of course it's not a democracy. Anyone who
Christopher Nelson wrote:
Okay. The DFSG are more supportive of developer's rights.
Again, not true. How exactly is a developer who releases under a non-DSFG
license somehow lower on the totem pole of rights? Both protect the
developer's rights. Both describe exactly what is and is not
Christopher Nelson wrote:
With Free software, you have the right to modify, pass along code, fork,
distribute, and feed upstream. The only restriction on those rights is
that with GPL and similiar you grant them to others.
And there's the rub, innit. The only restriction means that you
Christopher Nelson wrote:
My biggest problem with BSD-style licenses is that someone can take your
work, use it, and then restrict other's access to their improvements.
So the GPL restricts their freedom to do just that. That has been my main
point from the onset. It is not free. It is
Gene Heskett wrote:
Are you saying that the social security I get every month is somehow
free?
To you? Sure is. Social Security is the only legal ponzi scam allowed in
the US. Your Social Security payments are paid by present day workers. Your
withholdings were spent as you earned
Andy Streich wrote:
Just the other day I was watching a Senate
hearing where a songwriter was saying she could not make a living without the
copyright and IPR laws. And I've wondered a long time about how the economy
might have to change if there were no IPR. The idea has appeal in so
Erik Persson wrote:
As stated earlier, the BSD-licence requires, among other things, that:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
Wulfy wrote:
Erm. What does ponzi mean? I can't find it in any of my
dictionaries, so I assume it's American Slang...
Divided by a common language...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5
John Stumbles wrote:
Since my first experience with GNOME was of the apps bundled with it
that rather put me off. Now that I know what I want to use (e.g. k3b) I
could probably get along with GNOME if I had to. However since I'm now
reasonably familar with KDE it'd be a learning curve to get
Gene Heskett wrote:
The pols of course. They are the ones who set this ponzi scheme, one
that would jail you or I for an extended period if we were caught doing
it.
Then your aim is off. They are supposed to answer to the population so
your beef is with me.
But thats not my problem
Andy Streich wrote:
That does not seem accurate. Royalties from radio play and sales are
significant to many artists. The songwriter I heard said she makes $0.09
(some sort of average figure) each time a song of hers is played on the radio
and that sort of income was essential for her.
Gene Heskett wrote:
So would I. But I'll be damned if I'll sit back and let them fix it by
breaking the promise I was made in 1947 when I got an SS card so I
could go to work the first time. If they can do it without upsetting
the systems results, then I'm pretty much all for it.
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
how exactly is my employee, who lost his job when his company
outsourced his job to the far east, being irresponsible? He was a
model employee, good time in, liked by all etc. Had two kids and a
wife. Now he's shlepping burgers for me and gets EIC. How exactly is
Mumia W wrote:
Perhaps, Steve, you should have read this section:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme#Are_national_retirement_programs_Ponzi_schemes.3F
That section explains why national retirement schemes are *not* ponzi
schemes.
What makes you think I didn't. I read the entire
Willie Wonka wrote:
Oh - and I use Mozilla Mail - but this list (and others) have w-a-y too
much mail for me to d/l and sort through - which is why I prefer
webmail over pop3. I did subscribe to this list (for 10 minutes) once,
but again, it's too tedious to try and use the webmail's severly
chris roddy wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
I don't want to change the social order or be
the downfall of capitalism, or kill MicroSoft or any of
the other social goals so often associated with Linux.
It sounds like you have gravely misunderstood the debian social
contract, or you have not read
Mike McCarty wrote:
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
I once couldn't read or view my old work after switching employer,
because I suddenly didn't have a licence for a certain program any
more and all work that was done with that program was more or less lost.
Umm, you never did have that license,
Mike McCarty wrote:
I understand the situation completely. You apparently do not.
Sorry, no, you so are off your rocker it's not funny. See this, this is
me not laughing.
If he created (as he said) his *own* files using those tools,
and not those of his employer, then he used a pirate
Mike McCarty wrote:
Well, since I got *PLONK*ed, there's no point in
replying, is there? I don't like what I'm hearing,
so I guess I'll put my fingers in my ears.
Generally that's what one does when a child is wailing it's head off and
the parents are nowhere in sight. Random noise is
Curt Howland wrote:
My personal experience with ext2 was that the occasional power failure
or accidental hitting of the switch caused just too many problems. I
still let the fsck happen every 30 mounts or so, I don't turn that
off.
With my uptimes that's about once every 10 years. :/
Christopher Nelson wrote:
So you are most definately Right Wing, as the DFSG,
which support personal rights; changing the way 'traditional software'
is developed; and is not business-associated; scares and irks you so
greatly.
DFSG is no more supportive of personal rights than
Mumia W wrote:
You know we're talking about contemporary American politics.
Because, as we all know, this is an American list and only American
politics matter in the world.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I
Greg Folkert wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 13:59 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
ssh stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd /usr/sbin/sshd
For the record, -i at the end.
Sort of why I put the comment:
Now, since I have not tested this at all... it should really
work
Steve Lamb wrote:
Joey Hess wrote:
Many embedded systems don't have swap. ssh in inetd worked ok last time
I used it as long as speed was not important.
Thanks, Joey, I'll give it a whirl later on and let everyone know. Was
just hoping that it was a question on dpkg-reconfigure that I
Greg Folkert wrote:
update-rc.d -f ssh remove
Not true, that's the first thing I tried and none of the links were
removed. :/
Oh, wait, maybe the -f makes a world of difference. *blush*
Never logout of said machine completely until you can login back in
Yeah, knew that
Chris Lale wrote:
[ snipped 46 lines of quoted material ]
And another.
Whoa, who let the AOLer in here.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
Hal Vaughan wrote:
Interesting dilemma for any Quakers (or members of any peace churches)
who are FOSS advocates. Does one take the chance to advocate for open
source or suggest that the entire program should be dropped?
Scrap the whole thing unless I'm missing the make video games
Is there some automated method of placing sshd into inetd? I've attempted
to dpkg-reconfigure openssh-server to no avail.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
Greg Folkert wrote:
Why would one want sshd to run from inetd?
Machine with low RAM that I rarely access via ssh. I do need access from
time to time via ssh however. 500k of a resident ssh is 500k I could free up
by moving it to inetd.
ssh stream tcp nowait root /usr/sbin/tcpd
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
-i Specifies that sshd is being run from inetd(8). sshd is normally
not run from inetd because it needs to generate the server key
before it can respond to the client, and this may take tens of
seconds.
Uh, does
Matthew R. Dempsky wrote:
Depending on how RAM limited the system is, you might also take a look
at dropbear; it's a lightweight ssh server available in Debian.
Ah, thanks. It's a 96 from unixshell.com. Trying to fit exim,
apache(-ssl), SA, clamav all in 96Mb is rough. :(
--
Matthew R. Dempsky wrote:
It generates the host-specific keys at install time, but the v1 ssh
protocol requires a second smaller RSA key generated that's not used for
more than an hour, whereas the v2 protocol uses Diffie-Hellman.
Ah, thanks for the explination!
--
Steve C.
Martin A. Brooks wrote:
If a process is unused for any length the time it will get swapped out
and will use very little, if any, real memory until it's woken up.
Limited swap as well. I just rather it be well and gone and only
loaded when required.
--
Steve C. Lamb |
Joey Hess wrote:
Many embedded systems don't have swap. ssh in inetd worked ok last time
I used it as long as speed was not important.
Thanks, Joey, I'll give it a whirl later on and let everyone know. Was
just hoping that it was a question on dpkg-reconfigure that I was missing.
--
chris roddy wrote:
so, just switch to mepis and unsubscribe from debian-user already. your
show has gotten tiresome.
Might I suggest a filter? Or maybe just pressing delete? I find it
mildly ironic that people who flock to a distribution supposedly for it's
social contract are some of the
Kent West wrote:
I believe you misunderstand Joey's post. He's not asking for any help.
He's just pointing out to Steve Lamb that Steve has ignored his previous
post, which follows this timeline (as I recall it).
I haven't ignored it. I am just not prone to me too posts. If I agree
Joey Hess wrote:
Er, my point is that whinging about Debian's policy not allowing it to
support installing to hardware that needs non-free drivers is pointless
when there are examples of hardware that needs non-free drivers which
Debian has been made to install to just fine. Most of this
Steve Lamb wrote:
No. I am not advocating that Debian do anything legal. But there is a
Of course I meant illegal here, not legal. Oh for the ability to stop
sending upon seeing errors like this a split second after hitting send. :)
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
Here's what I don't understand: If you like what other distributions
do better, why are you so busy trying to convince debian to change?
Why not just switch to one of the several distros you've mentioned?
Several? I've mentioned one. Why? Because at the core it
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
Who are these most people, and why should it matter to the developers
what most people want when they're not paying customers?
Go through the archives of this list and read how many times people cite
Apt as the reason they use and stick with Debian. The social
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right
from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if
they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian
without the social contract would be just another distro.
Paul Johnson wrote:
There's nothing stopping you from installing nonfree software on your system.
You just probably won't be able to apt-get it. Case in point: You can get
games for Linux at WalMart for around $20 per title.
Sure there is. We're talking about the install here.
601 - 700 of 2324 matches
Mail list logo
